7 ms·

If it is unimportant to you, and important to her, then splitting the difference doesn’t mean doing it your way half the time. If it instead is important to bo

by yojo 5y ago

If it is unimportant to you, and important to her, then splitting the difference doesn’t mean doing it your way half the time. If it instead is important to both of you, then you have a fundamental problem that you need to sit down and work through. Maybe there is a compromise that will leave both of you happy. Maybe one of you is willing to try changing. Or maybe you have an irreconcilable difference and need to split up. Honestly if you are both ready to consider divorce before you change your dishwashing behavior, that’s a pretty big warning sign that things aren’t on the right track. An example: I don’t give a shit about clothes on the bedroom floor. No one but me and my wife ever sees them. But it bothers her. It costs me very little to dump the clothes in a hamper, and makes her much happier. So I put my clothes in the hamper as much as I can remember to, and she gives me grace the times I forget. Happily together for 20 years so far.

the_omegist 5y ago
You omit the fact to some people _anything_ is important and for some nearly _nothing_ is. That would lead to a de facto master/slave-like relationship. People's desire to shape the relationship (and hence their partner's) is asymmetrical. In your example, you don't mention what _you_ made her change to compromise with something _you_ felt was important (and i don't want any answer, as it's something private). It just that it sounded like the classic "married with children"/"the simpsons" premise...
gleenn 5y ago
He did mention that he would never care to change his behavior and had two reasons to continue doing it. I guess that doesn't mean it's the hill he would go to die on. I do struggle with the same thing, at what point is it something that's no longer a conversation, you should just change because the other person decided they cared enough about it. Having the wife end a marriage over it also seems ridiculous. If people can't come to realize they are asking for something silly but it's a big deal to them, that seems like that partner's problem. If I just sit around and say everything is "important", does that mean I get to have it my way all the time?
- TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
  > If I just sit around and say everything is "important", does that mean I get to have it my way all the time? This is my question, and i would like to hear from OP, married 33+ years, on his attitude about this.
  - landryraccoon 5y ago
    > If I just sit around and say everything is "important", does that mean I get to have it my way all the time? Is the implication here that your spouse views their marriage as a game they need to “win”, and saying “this is important” are the magic words they need to say to win? Or are they sincerely trying to compromise and saying “I’m trying to meet you halfway but this is genuinely important to me”?
  - llbeansandrice 5y ago
    This is an extreme example/edge case and if that's truly the case you are either not participating in good faith or would likely benefit from cognitive behavioral therapy. You're approaching the topic of a healthy marriage from game theory where your spouse is another player/opponent, not from empathy and good-faith participation or even just as a team with a common goal. Is your goal to "have it your way all the time", or is it to have a healthy and loving marriage with your spouse? If you approach it from the latter perspective, the question doesn't really make any sense.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - redbar0n 5y ago
      To be fair, it’s not really about coldly «saying something is important». I think the question is really better restated as: What if one person just feels more strongly about things (most or all of the time)? Should feelings always trump? Should feelings always be allowed to trump rationality/proportionality in a marriage conflict? PS: > You're approaching the topic of a healthy marriage from game theory made me laugh out loud :D
zaroth 5y ago
Right, you do this small act of service because you are in love with your partner. Ideally not even because it makes her happy, but because it makes you happy to make her happy. The upshot of the article, IMO, is that they were no longer in love. And that lack of love became most apparent by observing all the tiny acts of service that people in love do for each other, and people who are merely co-habitating and perhaps also co-parenting, do not give a flying fuck about and use as a safe thing to argue about instead of admitting the truth.
- abracadaniel 5y ago
  I think the author’s intent was to say that the little things lead to little resentments, and resentment destroys love.

by yojo 5y ago

the_omegist 5y ago

You omit the fact to some people _anything_ is important and for some nearly _nothing_ is. That would lead to a de facto master/slave-like relationship. People's desire to shape the relationship (and hence their partner's) is asymmetrical. In your example, you don't mention what _you_ made her change to compromise with something _you_ felt was important (and i don't want any answer, as it's something private). It just that it sounded like the classic "married with children"/"the simpsons" premise...

gleenn 5y ago

He did mention that he would never care to change his behavior and had two reasons to continue doing it. I guess that doesn't mean it's the hill he would go to die on. I do struggle with the same thing, at what point is it something that's no longer a conversation, you should just change because the other person decided they cared enough about it. Having the wife end a marriage over it also seems ridiculous. If people can't come to realize they are asking for something silly but it's a big deal to them, that seems like that partner's problem. If I just sit around and say everything is "important", does that mean I get to have it my way all the time?

TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
> If I just sit around and say everything is "important", does that mean I get to have it my way all the time? This is my question, and i would like to hear from OP, married 33+ years, on his attitude about this.
- landryraccoon 5y ago
  > If I just sit around and say everything is "important", does that mean I get to have it my way all the time? Is the implication here that your spouse views their marriage as a game they need to “win”, and saying “this is important” are the magic words they need to say to win? Or are they sincerely trying to compromise and saying “I’m trying to meet you halfway but this is genuinely important to me”?
- llbeansandrice 5y ago
  This is an extreme example/edge case and if that's truly the case you are either not participating in good faith or would likely benefit from cognitive behavioral therapy. You're approaching the topic of a healthy marriage from game theory where your spouse is another player/opponent, not from empathy and good-faith participation or even just as a team with a common goal. Is your goal to "have it your way all the time", or is it to have a healthy and loving marriage with your spouse? If you approach it from the latter perspective, the question doesn't really make any sense.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - redbar0n 5y ago
    To be fair, it’s not really about coldly «saying something is important». I think the question is really better restated as: What if one person just feels more strongly about things (most or all of the time)? Should feelings always trump? Should feelings always be allowed to trump rationality/proportionality in a marriage conflict? PS: > You're approaching the topic of a healthy marriage from game theory made me laugh out loud :D

zaroth 5y ago

Right, you do this small act of service because you are in love with your partner. Ideally not even because it makes her happy, but because it makes you happy to make her happy. The upshot of the article, IMO, is that they were no longer in love. And that lack of love became most apparent by observing all the tiny acts of service that people in love do for each other, and people who are merely co-habitating and perhaps also co-parenting, do not give a flying fuck about and use as a safe thing to argue about instead of admitting the truth.

abracadaniel 5y ago
I think the author’s intent was to say that the little things lead to little resentments, and resentment destroys love.